Low moisture feed block with cold flow resistance

ABSTRACT

A method of forming a low moisture block with cold flow resistance proceeds by subjecting a feed mixture containing molasses-like liquids to mixing to form a homogenous mixture; dehydrating the molasses-like mixture to less than about 2.0% moisture using heating; adding to the dehydrated molasses-like liquid mixture one or more feed ingredients in dry ingredient form, comprising 10% to 50% by weight of the resulting mixture; and adding to the dehydrated molasses-like mixture a composition comprising CaO or reactive MgO or combinations thereof, with the composition comprising 0.1% to 10% by weight of the resulting mixture. The composition is mixed in to form a homogenous mixture.

FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The present invention relates to low moisture blocks used to deliverfeed supplements and other ingestible substances to animals.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

Low moisture feed blocks for animals made by dehydrating molasses andadding special nutritional elements and other ingredients have becomewidely used. Such blocks are generally highly palatable and thus attractanimals, permitting them to serve as a delivery vehicle for feedsupplements or other feed elements provided on an ad libitum consumptionbasis. They also have a consumption limiting feature, in that theygenerally must be consumed by licking, rather than in bites, which slowsingestion. The combination of attraction and slow consumption also helpsto hold grazing animals in locations near the blocks. See, e.g., U.S.Pat. Nos. 6,244,217; 6,390,024 and 6,561,133.

As a result of these qualities, low moisture blocks have become widelyused in many animal feed situations with many different ingredientformulations. However, it has been noted, particularly in warmerclimates, that low moisture blocks tend to exhibit cold flow properties.That is, although they are for most purposes a solid, relatively hardmass, stable in shape and able to withstand rain, at warmer ambienttemperatures gravity causes them to tend to slump slowly. When the blockmaterial is within an upright container (as is usually the case), and itsimply slumps to conform further to the container, the cold flow haslittle or no noticeable effect. However, if a low moisture blockcontainer is tipped or torn (as can happen when large animals interactwith it) or if it is biodegradable and partially breaks down or if theblock is deployed without a container, the cold flow property will causethe block material to slump into a flattened pile or puddle within about48 hours of exposure to an air temperature, or direct sunlight causing ablock surface temperature, over 85 degrees F., which is typical insummer time of many parts of the U.S. The block behaves like waterseeking its own level, albeit so slowly the slumping seemsimperceptible. For situations where the low moisture block is to beconsumed over a longer period and slumping will occur to an undesirabledegree before complete consumption, resistance to cold flow would behighly desirable.

BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE DISCLOSURE

This discloses a method for forming a low moisture block with cold flowresistance. The method comprises subjecting a feed mixture containingmolasses-like liquids to mixing to form a homogenous mixture;dehydrating the molasses-like mixture to less than about 2.0% moistureusing heating; adding to the dehydrated molasses-like liquid mixture oneor more feed ingredients in dry ingredient form, comprising 10% to 50%by weight of the resulting mixture; adding to the dehydratedmolasses-like mixture a composition comprising at least one of CaO,reactive MgO, ZnO, MnO, FeO, CuO, CuO₂ or combinations thereof, with thecomposition comprising 0.1% to 10% by weight of the resulting mixture;and mixing in the composition to form a homogenous mixture.

This discloses a low moisture block formulation with resistance to coldflow comprising a molasses-like mixture dehydrated to less than 2% byweight water; dry feed ingredients, mixed with the dehydratedmolasses-like mixture and comprising 10% to 50% by weight of theresulting mixture of dehydrated molasses-like mixture and dryingredients; and a composition comprising at least one of CaO, reactiveMgO, ZnO, MnO, FeO, CuO, CuO₂ or combinations thereof, mixed with thedehydrated molasses-like mixture, wherein the composition comprises 0.1%to 10.0% by weight of the resulting mixture of molasses and dryingredients.

DESCRIPTION OF DRAWINGS

FIG. 1 shows a prior art method of making a low moisture block.

FIG. 2 is a high-level flowchart of a process for making a low moistureblock with a composition such as calcium oxide (CaO), reactive MgO, ZnO,MnO, FeO, CuO, CuO₂ or combinations thereof added to resist cold flow.

FIGS. 3A and 3B shows low moisture block material in tipped containersand the results of cold flow with two levels of added CaO and with noCaO.

FIG. 3C shows low moisture blocks with and without added CaO and with nocontainer, showing the results of cold flow.

FIGS. 4A-4D are graphs showing the reduction of slump in cane and beetmolasses low moisture blocks to which various percentages of CaO havebeen added, relative to low moisture blocks to which no CaO has beenadded.

FIG. 5 is a table showing the reduction of slump in cane molasses lowmoisture blocks to which 1.5% by weight of CaO and eight other possiblecold flow affecting agents have been added, relative to a control blockto which no cold flow affecting agent has been added.

FIGS. 6A and 6B show low moisture block material in tipped containers,left in sun and in the shade, respectively, in 90 degrees ambienttemperature, and the results of cold flow with 1.5% CaO and controlblock with no CaO.

FIG. 7A is a graph comparing cold flow effects in cane molasses blockswithout hydrolyzed vegetable oils and with 1.5% CaO added vs. no CaO.

FIG. 7B is a graph comparing cold flow effects on in-plant cooked beetmolasses blocks with dried premix and with 1.5% CaO added vs. no CaO.

FIG. 7C is a graph comparing hardness of the cane molasses blockswithout hydrolyzed vegetable oils and the in-plant cooked beet molassesblocks with dried premix and with 1.5% CaO added vs. no CaO, which arethe subject of FIGS. 7A and 7B.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

Feed Supplement Blocks.

Feed blocks are currently made primarily by three methods and classifiedby these methods:

1. Poured/chemical blocks, which are made by hardening the combinedingredients of the product with chemical reactions between water andmineral oxides. Examples of such blocks are found in U.S. Pat. Nos.4,016,296 (DeSantis), 4,027,043 (Schroeder), 5,236,717 (Vinci),6,726,941, (Ethington, Jr. et al.) and 6,793,947 (Bachmeier). Thereactions used to cause hardening vary. DeSantis speaks of using waterbinding agents, such as calcium sulfate hemihydrate, calcium chlorideand mixtures thereof. DeSantis also discusses a hard soap which isformed in situ by the reaction of a hard metallic soap former with afatty acid soap former, citing as hard metallic soap formers calciumoxide, sodium hydroxide and mixtures thereof. DeSantis describes makinga block by mixing molasses and water absorbent clay in a high speedshearing action to form a dispersion, in which the water absorbent clayabsorbs and binds from about 5 to 10 times its weight in water from themolasses. The dispersion is then mixed with the water binding agent, thehard metallic soap former, the fatty acid soap former, special purposeadditives and some other nutrients. DeSantis mentions adding the soapformers last so as to reduce the quantity of soap formed, which (perDeSantis) is difficult to digest by ruminants, for which block formfeeds are often used.

Schroeder describes “an animal feed supplement which contains a majorproportion of molasses and solidifying components of a phosphate orphosphoric acid and a metal oxide or salt in sufficient quantities andproportions to solidify the product.” Per Schroeder, “the compositionalso contains an edible fat or oil and a fat emulsifying agent toprevent separation of the fat or oil from the solid composition. Mostpreferably, starch is employed as the fat emulsifying agent since thestarch enhances solidification of the composition.” Schroeder statesthat the metal ingredients that can be employed are aluminum, calcium ormagnesium oxides or salts. Of these, calcium is the preferred andcalcium oxide and/or gypsum are most preferred. Schroeder acknowledgesthat the exact nature of the reaction is not known but suggests “theremay be a reaction product formed by a partial neutralization of thephosphoric acid or by a metathesis reaction between soluble phosphatesand metal additives”.

2. Pressed blocks are made by blending ingredients, conditioning them,and placing them under pressure and heat with a binding agent to attainhardness. Examples of such blocks are found in U.S. Pat. No. 3,532,503(Kviesitis). Kviesitis describes making a block by mixing molasses witha non-absorbent carrier material that is then dried. A surface activeemulsion is then mixed with the dry material and the mixture is steamedand pressed into blocks. U.S. Pat. No. 6,168,803 (Harris) also describesa pressed block, but it is more of a hybrid of a chemical block andpressed block. Harris' abstract describes the method as follows: “Aprocess for preparing animal feed blocks requiring minimum physicalcompression which consists of adding an aqueous feed mixture to dry orsemi-moist nutritive ingredients and at least one alkaline earth metaloxide. The resulting non-pourable and non-pumpable mixture is thentransferred to a receiver, such as a mold, and subjected tocompression.” (Alkaline earth metals include: beryllium, magnesium,calcium, strontium, barium and radium.)

3. Low-moisture blocks are made by dehydration of the base ingredient,usually a molasses or molasses derivative, through thermal evaporation.Here too, there are hybrids, which may be formulated to achieve aparticular physical objective. U.S. Pat. No. 4,749,578 (Benton et al.)discusses making an improvement over a prior molasses-based block thathad a tendency to swell during manufacturing, developing a porousstructure, and, when deployed, to soften and become sticky and hard tohandle from absorbing atmospheric moisture. The process for making theBenton et al. block is described as follows:

-   -   The water resistant, non-porous, hard, vitreous feed block of        the present invention is generally made by the following method.        A fluid feed composition is provided comprising molasses, about        1% to 2% by weight of unsaturated free fatty acids, and an        amount of bivalent base sufficient to saponify said fatty acids        into an insoluble soap to enhance the water resistance of the        feed block. The fluid feed composition may also comprise a        nutritionally compatible acid or base in an amount sufficient to        maintain the pH of said composition between about 6.2 to about        6.8 to reduce the swelling of the feed block, and about 1% to        about 2% by weight of lecithin to reduce the stickiness of the        composition. All weight percents expressed herein are of the        total fluid feed composition.    -   After the fluid feed composition has been thorough mixed, it is        heated at ambient pressures to a temperature within a range from        about 225° F. to about 300° F. to drive off most of the water        content of the molasses and other ingredients. Thereafter, the        fluid feed composition is subjected to a vacuum without any        further heating to remove any additional water remaining in the        fluid feed composition.    -   Following the vacuum step, about 18% to about 30% by weight of a        dry meal flour is admixed with the hot fluid feed composition to        provide additional nutritional values, and to reduce the        swelling of the feed block by reducing its temperature. The feed        composition is then formed into feed blocks and allowed to        harden.

Thus, Benton demonstrates that in a low-moisture block the technique ofsaponification used in the cooking step for poured/chemical blocks canbe used. However, for the addition of calcium hydroxide (hydrated lime)to saponify the free fatty acids, Benton reports that only about 1.65%by total mixture weight may be added, because greater concentrationscause the mixture to fume and bubble. Benton appears to usesaponification for forming an insoluble soap to enhance the waterresistance of the feed block and to perform that saponification beforedehydration and does not mention cold flow. Benton also teaches addingan anhydrous salt to further reduce the water content of the feed blockby forming a crystalline complex with any water remaining in saidcomposition after vacuum distillation. The anhydrous salts Bentonsuggests comprise sodium sulfate, magnesium sulfate, calcium chloride,and any other anhydrous salt which is nutritionally compatible with thefeed block.

Forming Low Moisture Blocks with Cold Flow Resistance.

FIG. 1 shows a current method for making low-moisture blocks thatachieve solid form by water removal from the molasses that is a majorconstituent, rather than by saponification or other chemical reactionduring the main mixing process. Thus, the primary step in hardeningblocks with this process is dehydration. This dehydration process occursby application of heat (between 250° F. and 300° F. (120° C. and 150°C.)) and vacuum. The low-moisture blocks are manufactured in a preciselycontrolled process that cooks beet or cane molasses products and fat(hydrolyzed vegetable oil or HVO), reducing the moisture content inthese ingredients to less than about two percent. The dehydratedmolasses and fat is then blended with “dry” ingredients, which mayinclude proteins, macro-minerals, vitamins, trace minerals and othersupplements. The resulting product is placed in shallow steel barrels,plastic containers, biodegradable containers or other containers. As theproduct cools, the sugars in the molasses solidify to form aconsistently hard block that will not crack or crumble and that can'teasily be bitten, chewed, or over-consumed. The blocks are largelyimpervious to the elements; so for blocks placed in grazing situations,there is no wasted supplement due to wind, rain or snow. However, asnoted, such blocks exhibit cold flow or creep, which can lead to wastein cases of container tipping or breaking.

The present disclosure shows a method for making a low-moisture feedblock that has less cold flow and formulations of such a block. Blockswith resistance to cold flow can reduce losses that may occur when acontainer of low moisture material is broken or tipped. Resistance tocold flow also permits wider use of biodegradable containers, whichstand longer when filled with the cold flow resistant material,particularly if damaged. The biodegradable containers eliminate wasteand the effort of collecting and recycling the typical large plastic orsteel containers when empty. In some applications cold flow resistancemeans that a container need not be used when the block is deployed.Thus, with a low-moisture block resistant to cold flow, both use ofbiodegradable containers and elimination of containers are possible,resulting in an environmental benefit.

Resistance to the cold flow that appears inherent in most low moistureblocks has been found to occur from the addition of CaO to thedehydrated molasses base mixture just before, during or shortly afterthe dry materials are added to the dehydrated base mixture. Inparticular, it has been found that adding about 0.5% to 8% CaO by weightof the final product significantly reduces cold flow. Although up to 10%CaO is possible and cold flow resistance continues to be achieved, thehigher CaO percentage may become uneconomic, depending on ingredientcosts, and also may throw a nutritional plan out of balance, dependingon the feed application. Similarly, useful cold flow resistance effectscan be expected with CaO present at rates as low as 0.1% by weight.Thus, inclusion of 0.1 to 10% CaO by weight is a desired range, at leastfor those feeding situations where the extreme ends of these ranges donot, for the particular animals that consume the block, pose nutritionalissues.

FIG. 2 shows a flow chart of a method for adding CaO (or a similarcomposition that reduces cold flow) in a process for forming a lowmoisture block. The CaO (or similar composition) is added only aftermoisture has been almost completely removed from the molasses basemixture by dehydration (heating and vacuum). The CaO (or similarcomposition) is added to the dehydrated molasses-like mixture when it isat a temperature in the range of 145° F. (63° C.) to 180° F. (82° C.),before sugar crystallization occurs.

Typically, after the dehydration step the moisture level of the molassesmixture is less than about 2% by total weight of the mixture coming outof the dehydration step. For example, an initial mixture with 20%-30%moisture may be dehydrated to less than 2% moisture. The CaO (or similarcomposition) is added during the addition of dry ingredients or justbefore or after they are added. The dry ingredients typically compriseprotein meals, micro or macro minerals, vitamins, essential oils,medications or other feed additives. Although the dry ingredients bearthat name (as a contrast to the liquid molasses), they may have amoisture content in the range of 5% to 14% of their weight. Thus,depending on how much of the block mixture is dry ingredients, which maybe 5% to 50%, or 10% to 50% of the weight of the total mixture aftertheir addition, some increase in moisture content of the dehydratedmolasses-base mixture relative to its moisture content after dehydrationmay occur with their addition.

FIGS. 3A, 3B show a time sequence of photographs of two sets of lowmoisture block test samples taken from production batches. The blockcomposition was 35% dry ingredients added to a liquid with 3%-5% HVO andthe balance being molasses. The first sample set is in the top row (FIG.3A); the second set is in the row below (FIG. 3B). In each set there aretwo samples prepared with the preceding process, one with 1.5% and thesecond with 0.75% CaO by weight of the total mixture after theiraddition. Each set also includes a control block with 0% CaO. Thepercentages of CaO are marked on the various samples in the first frameof FIGS. 3A and 3B. These samples were prepared by filling thecontainers in an upright position. The cooled containers were thentipped, as shown, and remained in an outdoor (top row) and an indoor(bottom row) environment in August with ambient temperatures of 60 to 90degrees F. Pictures were taken at the start (time of tipping) and at 5and 96 hours after the start.

As can be seen in FIGS. 3A, 3B, the least cold flow appears with the1.5% CaO sample, and the cold flow is significant after 96 hours for the0% CaO sample. The condition of the 0% CaO sample suggests that blockproduct with severe slump may be wasted by ground exposure and that theusual consumption control may be lost, because animals may be able tobite off protrusions of the creeping material. If a block maintains itsintegrity in a container, the animal only has access to the top surfaceof the material in the container and must lick, rather than bite, it.Maintaining block integrity maintains consumption control.

FIG. 3C shows a comparison of the condition of two low moisture blockswith no supporting container. Both photos were taken after the blockspent two days in a Texas pasture outdoor environment with 55 to 85degrees F. The top photo shows a low moisture block to which CaO wasadded after molasses mix dehydration, to reach 1.5% CaO by weight. Thebottom photo shows a low moisture block to which no CaO was added. Thelow moisture block to which no CaO was added shows significant slumpingafter two days. This falls short of the more typical desired block lifeof ten to twenty-one days, depending on feed application.

FIGS. 4A and 4B show further, quantitative test results for otherbatches of low moisture blocks to which CaO was added, in percentages of1%, 1.5%, 2% and 3% of final product weight and a control low moistureblock to which no CaO was added. Again, the block composition was 35%dry ingredients added to a liquid mixture with 3%-5% HVO, with thebalance being molasses. The resulting final moisture level afterdehydration was about 2.5%. To facilitate the quantitative measurementsof slump, the material was formed into a cone with a height of about 8.0cm and a base diameter of 6.9 cm. FIGS. 4A and 4B show quantitativeresults of slump tests for block material cone samples made with canemolasses. To accelerate the cold flow action for observation, thesamples were incubated at a continuous temperature of 120° F. Slump wasobserved over a period of 6 hours of such accelerated incubation. As canbe seen in FIG. 4A, the slumping from an initial block height of 8.0 cmwas greatest for the blocks with 1.0% CaO and no CaO. The data showhigher levels of slump reduction with higher percentages of CaO. FIG. 4Bshows the same results, expressed by a height percentage change withtime.

FIGS. 4C and 4D show quantitative results of slump tests for lowmoisture blocks made with beet molasses. The same composition and coneshape was used as for the samples of FIGS. 4A and 4B. Again, CaO wasadded to block mixes after dehydration, in percentages of 1%, 1.5%, 2%and 3% and there was a control low moisture block to which no CaO wasadded. To accelerate the cold flow action for observation, the samplesagain were incubated at a continuous temperature of 120° F. Slump wasobserved over a period of 3 hours of accelerated incubation. As can beseen in FIG. 4C, the slumping from an initial cone height of about 7.5cm (6.8 cm base diameter of cone) was greatest for the block with noCaO. FIG. 4D shows the same results expressed by a height percentagechange with time. Here the slumping occurred faster than with the canemolasses samples. The pattern of higher levels of slump reduction withthe higher levels of CaO is also evident with these beet molassessamples.

FIG. 5 shows further data on another set of samples, to which 1.5% byweight of the total product of CaO and of various other block cold flowresistance candidate chemicals, including Ca(OH)₂, MgSO₄, Na₂SO₄, CaSO₄,R—MgO (reactive magnesium oxide, i.e., essentially amorphous magnesiawith low lattice energy, made at low temperatures and finely ground,including highly reactive versions, e.g., Light-burn of caustic-calcinedMgO from TecEco Pty Ltd., of Tasmania, Australia), CaCl₂, CaCO₃, MgCl₂was added after dehydration, as well as a control block with nocandidate substance added. The same composition and cone shape was usedas for the samples of FIGS. 4A-4D. FIG. 5 shows decreasing heightmeasured from an original height in the range of 7.2-7.5 cm (varying bysample) and slumping as percentage decrease in height. These samplesalso were incubated at 120 degrees F. and measurements taken at thestart and at 2, 3 and 4 hours from the start. The data show that CaO isthe most effective of the candidate chemicals tested at 1.5% by weight.R—MgO was the next best alternative. The other candidate chemicalsshowed little difference as compared to the control, or even worseslumping than the control.

In contrast to the laboratory data, FIGS. 6A and 6B show the effects ofadding an agent to reduce cold flow in something more like aconventional block in a container in a field setting. FIGS. 6A and 6Bshow low moisture block material in tipped containers, left in sun andin the shade, respectively, in 90 degrees ambient temperature, and theresults of cold flow with 1.5% CaO and a control block with no CaO. Ascan be seen the block material without the added CaO shows significantcold flow, causing escape from the container.

Addition of CaO; Containers.

The general formula for low moisture blocks in which cold flow can beresisted by adding CaO is: cane molasses and/or beet molasses basedliquids; cane molasses and beet molasses mixed liquids which includeoil/fat; or any liquid containing sugars (mono-, di- or polysaccharides), in each case to which dry nutrients are added. The typicalproportions of ingredients are: cane/beet molasses: 40% or more;oil/fat: 20% or less; and other liquids: 40% or less (all weightpercentages of mixture before dehydration is applied). Alternatives tothe cane or beet molasses include other molasses-like liquids, such ascondensed separator by-products (CSB), separator molasses solubles(SMS), soy molasses or other similar molasses, lactose whey or otherliquid sources of mono-, di- or polysaccharides. Accordingly, as usedherein molasses-like liquids means any of the preceding materials orfunctional equivalents.

The CaO added is in the form of powder (Mesh 20 to 400) (obtainable fromMississippi Lime Company, of St. Louis, Mo.), or any chemical containingCaO as a major ingredient, and is mixed by any suitable mixer orblender. While the above results suggest that even greater cold flowresistance will occur with an increased weight percentage amount of CaO,the cost of the CaO and the desire not to overweight a feed product withit dictate finding a CaO amount range that is sufficient to resist coldflow to the desired extent for an application and expected temperatures.Based on the above results, a percentage amount of CaO from 0.1% to 10%by weight of the total product after the dry ingredients and CaO areadded to the dehydrated molasses and other ingredients is viewed asappropriate. A percentage amount of CaO by weight of the total productafter the dry ingredients and CaO are added to the dehydrated molassesand other ingredients also may be selected from the ranges: from 0.5% to8%, from 0.5% to 3%, from 1.0% to 3%, or from 1.5% to 3%.

The resistance to cold flow in low moisture blocks found to result fromthe addition of CaO is unexpected and not fully explained. AlthoughDeSantis (U.S. Pat. No. 4,016,296) mentions calcium oxide as a possiblehard metallic soap former for that poured/chemical block, DeSantiscontemplates a saponification process. DeSantis describes that asoccurring with the reaction of a hard metallic soap former with a fattyacid soap former. But DeSantis also calls for use of water absorbentclays and water binding agents. Saponification occurs when an alkalinemetal hydroxide, e.g., X(OH)n is caused to react with fatty acids and/orfat. This requires a higher temperature, e.g. over 200° F., to make afast reaction and achieve desired molecule formation. So DeSantisappears to be promoting different hardening methods and reactions, inparticular, methods that assume significant available water is present.Because the CaO added in the presently described process is added onlyafter dehydration, the water level available to the added CaO is verylow. Without enough water/moisture, CaO could not sufficiently react toform Ca(OH)₂ to make soap. Thus, in the present low moisture blockprocess and formulation, it is doubtful that any meaningful amount ofsaponification can occur.

Vinci (U.S. Pat. No. 5,236,717) also contemplates use of calcium oxidein a poured/chemical block. Vinci refers to a reaction that produces a“dry fatty acid calcium salt product” in granular form. The granules maybe used in a mixture with molasses to make a block, but only afterphosphoric acid is added, which Vinci seems to use as a thickener for anaqueous suspension of ingredients. Thus, Vinci is not working with adehydrated mixture or a low moisture block with his addition of CaO.

Bachmeier (U.S. Pat. No. 6,793,947) mentions calcium oxide along withmagnesium oxide as a hardener for a compressed block. Bachmeiercontemplates a mixture, including the calcium oxide or magnesium oxideas a hardener, with 25% to 40% moisture content as an input to thecompression step. Again, the calcium oxide of Bachmeier is notfunctioning in a dehydrated mixture as in the present low moisture blockprocess and formulation. Further, Bachmeier uses compression for blockproduction.

The prior art suggests that the substances such as MgSO₄ or NaSo₄ addedfor block hardening in an aqueous mixture are binding water bycrystallization. With the present addition of CaO to a dehydratedmixture, with very little free water, it is believed different reactionsare involved, than merely: CaO+H₂O->Ca(OH)₂.

Other evidence has been developed suggesting the reactions in prior artthat used CaO in a non-low moisture block are different than what occursin applicant's low moisture block. The graph of FIG. 7A indicates thatthe cold flow resistance effect of CaO treated blocks containing no HVOwas better than in a control containing no HVO and with no CaO. Gettingthis cold flow resistance result in blocks with no HVO implies the coldflow reduction effect was not due to soap formation. Thus, it appearsthat by adding CaO after dehydration, saponification from HVO andCa(OH)₂ reaction is not a primary reaction; rather, a reaction moredirectly connected with reducing cold flow characteristics of thecrystallizing sugars appears to be involved. Some evidence that theaddition of CaO in applicant's process is not causing significant waterreduction appears in moisture measurements showing that moisture contentof block material changed little after addition of CaO. In particularmoisture content was not lowered, as much as would have been expected ifwater-eliminating reactions occurred. In three test batches withdiffering levels of dehydration, with each batch having a controlportion with no CaO and a portion to which 1.5% CaO was added, thefollowing was observed:

H₂O % after Expected H₂O % w/Total Rx Batch Control H₂O % CaO Added (0.7reduction expected) A 2.56 2.78 1.86 B 2.03 1.80 1.33 C 3.50 3.46 2.80The graph of FIG. 7B compares cold flow reduction effects in blocks madewith dry ingredients that were dehydrated to a moisture level of 2%. TheCaO treated block had better cold flow resistance than a control with noCaO, even though both had very little moisture that might be used for ahydrated lime, concrete-forming like reaction or for water-binding withno reaction.

The chart of FIG. 7C further indicates that in the blocks of FIGS. 7Aand 7B, the addition of CaO does not affect the hardness of the block asmeasured by a Shore D durometer, although the CaO addition did cause thecold flow resistance effect.

EXAMPLES

The following are two specific examples of low moisture blockformulations that include CaO for resistance to cold flow.

Example 1

The following were mixed:

Percentage Percentage Ingredients (Wet basis) (Dry Basis) Molasses CaneWet 52.00 47.44 Molasses CSB Wet 17.00 13.81 Soybean Meal 20.00 25.00Hydrolyzed Vegetable Oil 3.80 4.75 (HVO) Dical Phosphate 21% Bulk 2.503.12 Limestone 2.50 3.12 Calcium Oxide (CaO) 1.20 1.50Trace-Mineral-Vitamin-Premix 1.00 1.25 Total 100.00 100.00The CaO was added after dehydration.

Example 2

The following were mixed:

Percentage Percentage Ingredients (Wet basis) (Dry Basis) Molasses BeetWet 55.00 51.69 Molasses CSB Wet 14.00 10.96 Soybean Meal 16.00 19.28Hydrolyzed Vegetable Oil 3.50 4.22 (HVO) Dical Phosphate 21% Bulk 3.003.61 Limestone 3.50 4.22 Urea Feed Grade 2.80 3.37 Calcium Oxide (CaO)1.25 1.51 Trace-Mineral-Vitamin-Premix 0.95 1.14 Total 100.00 100.00Again the CaO was added after dehydration.

The block material of the preceding examples and other formulations maybe placed in a biodegradable container. For example, the biodegradablecontainer is made from ground straw and wood fiber, which is coated witha soy flour solution for binding and is pressed and molded, or a iscontainer as disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 6,337,097 or 6,561,787.

Alternatives to CaO.

The data in FIG. 5, suggest that reactive magnesium oxide, R—MgO, may bea reasonable substitute for CaO to reduce cold flow in someapplications. R—MgO appears to provide somewhat less cold flow reductionthan CaO, but could be adequate in some environments. Based on chemicalsimilarities, the following additional oxides are reasonably expectedalso to provide cold flow resistance similar to that provided by CaO andR—MgO: ZnO (Zinc Oxide), MnO (Manganese Oxide), FeO (Ferrous Oxide), CuO(Cupric Oxide), CuO₂ (Cuprous Oxide). The various alternatives to CaOwould be applied at rates of 0.1 to 10% of the agent by weight, at leastfor those feeding situations where the extreme ends of these ranges donot, for the particular animals that consume the block and theparticular agent, pose nutritional issues. For example, sheep aregenerally considered sensitive to excess copper levels, although it isalso viewed as an essential key trace nutrient.

The following is a specific example of a low moisture block formulationthat includes R—MgO.

Example 3

The following were mixed:

Percentage Percentage Ingredients (Wet basis) (Dry Basis) Molasses CaneWet 55.00 50.25 Molasses CSB Wet 15.00 12.20 Soybean Meal 19.00 23.78Hydrolyzed Vegetable Oil (HVO) 3.60 4.51 Dical Phosphate 21% Bulk 3.003.75 Limestone 2.40 3.00 Reactive Magnesium Oxide (R—MgO) 1.20 1.50Trace-Mineral-Vitamin-Premix 0.80 1.00 Total 100.00 100.00The R—MgO was added after dehydration.

CaO and R—MgO Blends.

Certain additional tests were run to study the use of R—MgO and R—MgOblended with CaO, with the following results.

Study 1. Effects of CaO, R—MgO, and a mix of the two at 1:1, with aninclusion rate in a low moisture block of 1.5% w/w. This test had twopurposes: (a) to demonstrate that the effects of the CaO, R—MgO, and amix of the two are not only due to any water reaction (limited by thelow moisture level), but also involve other reactions; and (b) todemonstrate that R—MgO and similar metal oxide chemicals also act likeCaO to resist cold flow.

Test description: The following tests investigated the effects of CaO,R—MgO, and mix of the two at 1:1, with an inclusion rate in a lowmoisture block of 1.5% w/w. A control with no CaO or R—MgO was alsoused. The test “blocks”, formed as cones as in the prior tests, weremade in a laboratory. Each weighed 340 grams, with a height beforeincubation at about 7.5 cm. The incubation temperature to test for coldflow was at 120° F. The percentage of original height after three hoursincubation is in the table below.

Mix CaO/ Test No. Control CaO R—MgO R—MgO 1 - Cooked beet molasses 46.163.0 57.2 55.3 only (less than 0.5% total water) 2 - Cooked molasseswith 41.2 58.5 56.6 54.1 dried premix (less than 0.5% total water) 3 -Cooked molasses with 45.7 58.9 58.3 57.3 normal premix (3% or less totalwater)

As can be seen, the CaO, R—MgO, and a mix of the two at 1:1 all showedimproved cold flow inhibition relative to the control, in a test blockwith low moisture.

Study 2. Effects of CaO, R—MgO, and a mix of the two at 1:1, with aninclusion rate in a low moisture block of 1.5% w/w. This test had thepurpose to demonstrate that the effects of the chemicals used are notonly due to the limited water reaction, but also involve otherreactions, especially here reactions with sugar.

Test description: The following tests investigated the effects of CaO,R—MgO, and a mix of the two at 1:1; the inclusion rate for each test is1.5% w/w. The blocks were made in a laboratory using table sugar(sucrose). The sucrose was melted at 186° C., cooled down to 130° C. andmixed with respective compositions. The mixture was poured into cups tomake 940 gram “blocks”, in the shape of cones with a height beforeincubation at about 9.5 cm. A control with no CaO or R—MgO was alsoused. The incubation temperature was at 140° F. due to the larger size.The height percentage (of original cone height) after six hoursincubation is in the table below.

Control CaO Mix CaO/R—MgO R—MgO 38.9 57.6 58.2 44.6

As can be seen, the CaO, R—MgO, and a mix of the two at 1:1 all showedimproved cold flow inhibition relative to the control, in a test blockmade with only sugar available, with essentially no moisture.

The information and examples described herein are for illustrativepurposes and are not meant to exclude any derivations or alternativemethods that are within the conceptual context of the invention. It iscontemplated that various deviations can be made to this embodimentwithout deviating from the scope of the present invention. Accordingly,it is intended that the scope of the present invention be dictated bythe appended claims rather than by the foregoing description of thisembodiment.

I claim:
 1. A method of forming a low moisture block with cold flowresistance comprising: subjecting a feed mixture containingmolasses-like liquids to mixing to form a homogenous mixture;dehydrating the molasses-like mixture to less than about 2.0% moistureusing heating; adding to the dehydrated molasses-like liquid mixture oneor more feed ingredients in dry ingredient form, comprising 10% to 50%by weight of the resulting mixture; adding to the dehydratedmolasses-like mixture a composition comprising at least one of CaO,reactive MgO, ZnO, MnO, FeO, CuO, CuO₂ or combinations thereof, with thecomposition comprising 0.1% to 10% by weight of the resulting mixture;and mixing in the composition to form a homogenous mixture.
 2. Themethod of claim 1, wherein the step of dehydrating comprises heating tobetween 250° F. and 300° F. (120° C. and 150° C.) and the application ofa vacuum.
 3. The method of claim 1, wherein the molasses-like mixturecontains a molasses-like liquid selected from the group consisting ofcane molasses, beet molasses, condensed separator by-products (CSB),separator molasses solubles (SMS), soy molasses, lactose whey or aliquid source of mono-, di- or polysaccharides and mixtures thereof. 4.The method of claim 1 further comprising adding to the molasses-likeliquids hydrolyzed vegetable oils in amount of 0% to 20% by weight ofthe resulting mixture.
 5. The method of claim 1, wherein themolasses-like mixture comprises cane molasses or beet molasses ormixtures thereof.
 6. The method of claim 1 wherein the compositioncomprises 0.5% to 8.0% by weight of the resulting mixture.
 7. The methodof claim 1 wherein the composition comprises 0.5% to 3.0% by weight ofthe resulting mixture.
 8. The method of claim 1 wherein the compositioncomprises 1.5% to 3% by weight of the resulting mixture.
 9. The methodof claim 1, further comprising placing the resulting mixture into abiodegradable container.
 10. The method of claim 1, wherein thecomposition is added to the dehydrated molasses-like mixture when it isat a temperature in the range of 145° F. (63° C.) to 180° F. (82° C.).11. A low-moisture block with resistance to cold flow comprising: amolasses-like mixture dehydrated to less than 2% by weight water; dryfeed ingredients, mixed with the dehydrated molasses-like mixture andcomprising 10% to 50% by weight of the resulting mixture of dehydratedmolasses-like mixture and dry ingredients; and a composition comprisingat least one of CaO, reactive MgO, ZnO, MnO, FeO, CuO, CuO₂ orcombinations thereof, mixed with the dehydrated molasses-like mixture,wherein the composition comprises 0.1% to 10.0% by weight of theresulting mixture of molasses and dry ingredients.
 12. The low-moistureblock of claim 11, wherein the molasses-like mixture contains amolasses-like liquid from the group consisting of cane molasses, beetmolasses, condensed separator by-products (CSB), separator molassessolubles (SMS), soy molasses, lactose whey or a liquid source of mono-,di- or polysaccharides and mixtures thereof.
 13. The low-moisture blockof claim 11 further comprising hydrolyzed vegetable oils in an amount of0% to 20% by weight of the resulting mixture.
 14. The low-moisture blockof claim 11, wherein the molasses-like mixture comprises cane molassesor beet molasses or mixtures thereof.
 15. The low-moisture block ofclaim 11 wherein the composition comprises 0.5% to 8.0% by weight of theresulting mixture.
 16. The low-moisture block of claim 15 wherein thecomposition comprises 0.5% to 3.0% by weight of the resulting mixture.17. The low-moisture block of claim 11 wherein the composition comprises1.5% to 3% by weight of the resulting mixture.
 18. The low-moistureblock of claim 11, wherein the block is in a biodegradable container.19. The low-moisture block of claim 11, wherein the biodegradablecontainer comprises straw and/or wood fiber.
 20. A method of forming alow moisture block with cold flow resistance comprising: preparing afeed mixture containing molasses-like liquids; dehydrating themolasses-like mixture to less than about 2.0% moisture using heating;adding to the dehydrated molasses-like liquid mixture one or more feedingredients in dry ingredient form, comprising 10% to 50% by weight ofthe resulting mixture; and adding to and mixing in the dehydratedmolasses-like mixture a composition comprising CaO, reactive MgO orcombinations thereof, with the composition comprising 0.1% to 10% byweight of the resulting mixture, to form a homogenous mixture.
 21. Themethod of claim 20 wherein the composition comprises an amount withinthe range 0.5% to 8.0% by weight of the resulting mixture.
 22. Themethod of claim 20 wherein the composition comprises an amount withinthe range 0.5% to 3.0% by weight of the resulting mixture.
 23. Themethod of claim 20 wherein the composition comprises an amount withinthe range 1.5% to 3.0% by weight of the resulting mixture.